Defending individual liberty against the tyranny of government.
Truth, justice and the American way: liberty without compromise.

Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life,liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place. - Frédéric Bastiat

Monday, February 18, 2008

Joke of the day

An old priest lay dying in the hospital. For years, he had faithfully served his parishioners in Washington. He motioned for his nurse to come near.

"Yes, Father?" said the nurse.

"I would really like to see Bill and Hillary Clinton before I die," whispered the priest.

"I'll see what I can do."

The nurse sent the request to Hillary's Senate office and waited for a response. The word arrived quickly: the Clintons would be glad to visit the priest.

On their way to the hospital, Hillary said to Bill, "I don't know why he wants to see us, but it certainly will help our images and might help get me elected President. After all, I'm IN IT TO WIN IT."

Bill agreed. It would be a very good thing for her campaign once they put out a press release about it.

When they arrived at the priest's room, the old priest took Bill's hand in his left hand and Hillary's hand in his right. There was silence and a look of serenity on the old priest's face.

Finally Bill broke the silence. "Father, could we ask you something. Of all the people in the world, why did you choose us to be with you as you near the end?"

The old priest slowly replied, "I have always tried to pattern my life after our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ."

"Amen," said Bill.

"Amen," said Hillary.

The old priest continued, "And I would like to die as He did, between two lying thieves."

Saturday, February 16, 2008

A tale of two cowardly, racist liars

Previous post here. I don't like to delete comments. Even if a person is showing himself to be a moron, I prefer to let the comment stand and let you all see for yourselves. However, I always reserve the right to delete at my discretion.

In this case, "Contractor" left a comment that was a load of nonsense. He claimed to live on Boracay, said it's hardly "famous," yadda yadda, and then repeated the same lies about my fiancée. First, "famous" goes beyond his own provincial perception; it's a matter of how others perceive something as famous. It's a characteristic of liberals' natural arrogance. If something isn't important, "famous" or correct to them, it can't possibly be so.

Now he apparently found a friend in Nuthead, because he left a comment over on the twit's blog:

He called you a racist, but somehow its OK that his family only wanted him to marry a Filipina (which is just as racist as a father telling his daughter that she better not be messin' with them' thar niggar boys)

In fact, that isn't racist at all. Let's see him go up to parents who are traditional Jews, then accuse them of being "racist" because they don't want their children to marry a goy.

Racism involves a belief that one race is inherently superior. That's not the case here, or with Jews, Italians or any other ethnic group. Ever since my father died, and I was of age to start thinking about getting married, the other half (Filipino) of my family really wanted me to marry a Filipina. Not specifically to marry a Filipina, but because "You should find a nice Filipina who's traditional and will make you a good wife." They didn't want me to waste any more time with American girls, a lot of whom tend to be superficial.

Well, notwithstanding I'm only half Filipino anyway, I didn't want my family to "find someone" for me. I wanted to find someone on my own. And on my own, I happened to meet and fall in love with someone who's simply wonderful, and who happens to be Filipina.

He lists his location as being in NewYork...and threatened physical violence against you in public and involving your face with concrete - that is simple 'terroristic threatening', a legal term that has been around since before 9/11. It can be enacted upon pre-conviction by arrest warrant and detention for psychological evaluation in the State of New York.

It's, um, New York, with a space in the name.

Regardless of his ignorance, he can go right ahead and report me as he wishes. Was I making an active threat against anyone? Hardly. But I will state again, if any man wishes to have words with me, let him have the balls to say it to my face. What happens after that will not be my fault.

The goal seems to be to get her to the US, so that would seem like a mail-order bride.

Again, the tired old lie, from a pair of known liars and racists.

I've been thinking of moving there, as a matter of fact, as my father did. He went there on business, to invest in mining operations with some friends, and then he happened to meet and fall in love with someone he met at a party. So my father also married a "mail-order bride" too?

He spends a lot of time doing the Filipino-Pride angle...for a country and culture that he desperately doesn't want to live in with his new wife.

Another tired old lie, and he exhibits another classic liberal trait: assuming much about a person, which often becomes putting words into another person's mouth.

I always considered myself purely American. I grew up very American, even in the Philippines, speaking only English until I started learning other languages in school. Strangely enough, I've been coming a real Pinoy, when I'd have never dreamed of it a year ago.

The comment about airbrushing the pic, Perhaps he wasn't aware that every major professional photographer in the US of A typically photoshops every single proof in hopes of getting more prints sold. This is not new, been like that since the 70's...they used simple diffusion back then.

The photographer in the Philippines must be a sorcerer, then. Because he took the memory card out of the camera, put it in the computer, and showed us the pictures right away. His hand must have magical powers to airbrush the JPG right on the SD card!

Either that, or the guy is lying again. Occam's Razor tells us, yeah, he's just a liar.

And if anyone would like to meet me in person to see how "airbrushed" the pictures are, let me know. Charlie and Steve have been my friends for two decades; they know me as well as anyone.

My friend Karol noticed after I dropped 20 pounds. After 40, a friend's mother saw me for the first time since I began my training. She said it didn't look like me anymore. Besides improving my health dramatically, weight loss did change my face for the better. With a vegetable-oriented diet (meaning eating habits, not a weight loss fad) rather than a beef-oriented one, my complexion became lighter and clearer, and my skin tightened on its own.

I love his comment about being able to get any girl he wanted...I was living with a Norwegian male model for a while recently and even HE couldn't make that claim.

I could make a comment about this guy not being able to get a woman and so had to resort to fudge-packing, and that he apparently wasn't enough to satisfy his former partner, but I won't. Instead, I'll point out that I never said I could "get" any girl I wanted. My words are right there: "Even before I lost weight, I already could get "action" with girls. After slimming down, I could talk to most any girl I wanted..."

But he's right about one thing. I could never make the claim that I lived with a male model, let alone a Norwegian, and I'd never want to be able to make that claim. I'm not that type of guy.

I haven't seen any girls do a 'hair toss' since around 1990.

Based on his above admission, why would he notice what women do?

I can tell you exactly why he giving money to a "charity"...in the thousands of US passport holders I have known that got married to a native Filipina, one thing has NEVER failed to happen. They are asked for money. By the family. By the neighbors. Suddenly, there are relatives that need money for medical reasons, or the breadmaker of the house died and they need a little cash to help them thru the times.

What the fool does is take his own personal experience and extrapolate it to everyone else. This is the basis of the old liberal trick of "anecdote": something happened to him or someone he knows (foreclosure, bankruptcy because of medical bills, losing a job and not finding one for a year), so therefore it must be widespread among the population.

My in-laws have never asked me for money, nor would they. I suppose my mother-in-law was asking me for money every time she paid her own way, huh?

Or trickier, and not as common, suddenly a charity appears and they get all sorts of people in on it and before you know it, you're sponsoring kids in school because it makes you feel good and its only an even thousand and--oh yea--that kinda cements the wedding deal with the family.

Another "anecdote" that he insinuates must be my case.

Families act like they have the right to refuse on behalf of their daughters here. Not true. I've even seen a Mayor make that claim, right before he had this certain orphanage that needed a new roof..

See, there he goes again. "I've even seen," he says, so therefore it must be the case with me!

The fact is that I've never been asked for anyone by money, not even by the principal of the school. And if I had been asked to help donate for something worthwhile, like an orphanage, and I had the means to help, why should I refuse? Is this asshole so ignorant of the Third World that he thinks there aren't children in need?

This jerk exhibits a truly sinister kind of racism, painting Third World people not just as asking for money, not even as "always" asking for money, but implying they're greedy in asking for it. He also exhibits sheer hypocrisy in turning around and accuse my family of racism, just because they wanted me to marry a nice traditional girl.

If he really lives at Boracay, he's no doubt seen the poor people begging near the beach. What does he do to help them, or does he merely walk on by? Once again, not to make myself out to be a saint, but the very least I can do is give them whatever change I have, one- and five-peso coins, or a 20-peso note so that the children can at least buy some bread.

The first way I helped the school is by buying basic supplies, such as paper and pencils. In this village, the children sometimes cannot write, and if they cannot write, they cannot learn. Then it's the simple things to brighten their days, like candy. Every time I've gone to the Philippines, I've brought a duffel bag full of American candy. You never saw sweeter smiles or heard sweeter thank-yous. And I never felt so heartsick, or appreciative of our Western life, as when some of the children put the candy away, so they could bring it home and share with their families.

After that, it came down to finding out how many students had to drop out. Five bucks per student per year, that's it. So I challenge Nuthead, "Contractor" and all other hypocrites to look inside their hearts and reconsider what they're doing with their money.

Bono is the chief of such hypocrites. Instead of challenging others to give money, he should start cutting his luxurious expenses flying coach. He should walk among these desperately poor himself, and live among them, and learn what they must do to survive.

I decided not to leave any of those comments on his own blog though, I have no doubt they would be deleted.

The truth is that I deleted his previous comments because they said nothing new and simply perpetuated lies.

The next truth is that he was afraid to leave more here, in case I decided to rip them to shreds as I have here, so he libeled me elsewhere and hoped I wouldn't notice.

I probably spent too much time pointing out his racism, hypocrisy and outright lies, but the truth should be said, lest any of you believe the lies.

Thursday, February 14, 2008

Marginalizing (again) the biggest moron of old time

As you regular readers know, I don't have much time to blog anymore. But tonight I checked my blog meters to see who's been coming in via other sites' referrals, and guess who I found? A cockroach, crawling out of the darkness.

So the old asshole decides to insult my woman, calling her a "mail-order bride" just because she happens to be Filipina. Number one, it's an incredibly racist thing to say; as the commenter said, it's really low.

Number two, nothing could be further from the truth. She's not a mail-order bride. That's it. No matter how many times the putz spews it out of his beet-colored face, whether it's about American Idol or someone else's woman, 2 plus 2 does not equal 5. He's always been a flat-out liar, and he tells me I'm "self-oblivious" when he need only look in his compact, then take the lipstick out of his purse and write "liar" across his forehead. Among his other lies are what he claims is my "crush" on Chris Daugherty. Where the hell did he get that? The simple explanation is that he's the closet homo, transferring his frustrations upon someone who bests him intellectually.

Number three, anytime he'd like to say something to my face, he can go right ahead, naming the time and place convenient to us both, but he'll find the experience most unpleasant. It's a good thing he's mandated to have health insurance in Massachusetts, because he'll need it once I'm done smashing his sorry face through the pavement.

Now, that third I don't expect any sort of response to -- he's always been a coward, and he'll just run and hide, like always.

I don't talk a lot about my personal life. I'm not like my friend Jackie Passey, who very much based her popular blog on what she was doing (particularly her current relationships). That's not what my blog is about. I started it mostly to talk about free trade, and resultingly, most of you aren't here to read my stories of traveling, going to various types of meetings and performances, hanging out, street altercations, etc. You're here to read about economics, politics, and occasional social commentary, which unfortunately I can't provide regularly now. I've wanted to blog about meeting Doug Bandow (what a great guy) for the second time, but I haven't had the time.

Nonetheless, I'll divulge a few juicy(?) details tonight, to add fresh cement to the fact that the guy is a complete liar. I've known the future Mrs. Eidelbus for nearly a year. We liked each other from the beginning, and as this Massachusetts moron knows, she and I were on Boracay's famous white sand beach, watching the sunset, when I asked her to marry me. It couldn't have been a more quintessential moment to propose. Not to brag, but how many of you, men and women both, get that kind of setting, hmm?

Well, this schmuck is clearly jealous. First, that the love of my life is more beautiful than he could ever imagine, and second, that he couldn't even afford one plane ticket out there, let alone two.

I took these a few minutes after she said yes, so we could capture the moment. It was some evening. Her mother, elder brother and cousin came with us to Boracay. I was in their room at the hotel, when my not-yet fiancée decided to take our picture. She picked up my camera case and, miraculously, didn't feel something in the side pocket. Normally it's for batteries, but that day I had put inside it...the ring! That way we could go for a walk, and I'd know exactly where the ring would be, instead of possibly getting lost in my pocket. But she didn't feel it, and suddenly while sitting on the beach, I quickly retrieved the jewelry, put it in my hand, and pressed mine flat against hers.

Shall we talk about legal issues? I've thrown too much money away with lawyers who charged me hundreds of dollars, because I didn't really know and also didn't know they didn't really know, either. The long and short of it is that we'll have to get married twice. We only need one wedding, a church wedding, but it would have to be in the Philippines. My mother-in-law is the secretary of her local church, and I willingly submit to her desire that the wedding be there. But that isn't good enough for the U.S. government, so we'll have to have a civil wedding here first.

That's the easy part. For the church wedding, we have to plan a trip to the Philippines. We'll have to time things with my relatives in Pampanga (a couple hours north of Manila), Colorado and England, all of whom naturally would be missed if they didn't come. Oh, and my in-laws are all over Mindanao, Iloilo and even Luzon.

No small part of my trips to the Philippines are to meet as many of my in-laws as possible. My father-in-law passed away several years ago, before I could meet him, but this last time I could finally meet my new uncle, the eldest brother, who gave me formal permission to marry his niece. Filipinos are exceedingly traditional, and I made sure to ask my mother-in-law for permission, the night before I actually proposed. I have two new cousins who were my "attorneys" when I presented myself to the two sides of their family, vouching for my character.

Not the least of complications is that I haven't been Catholic since childhood. For a long time, the Catholic Church has allowed its members to marry baptized non-Catholic Christians, provided the non-Catholic spouse agreed to raise any children as Catholics. Since the early 1960s, the Catholic Church no longer required that, but it's still a complex issue.

Last but not least, the idiot unwittingly accused Staples of airbrushing. We had the picture taken by a professional photographer, no airbrushing needed, and I had it scanned at Staples for our Christmas cards last year. There are two simple reasons that the "topography" of my face looks very different. The picture on my blog is a grainy one that I've used since 2005. And last year, I kinda lost 40 pounds. The rest of us know that it makes a difference in your facial features, but this dimwit apparently didn't scour my blog that thoroughly.

Even before I lost weight, I already could get "action" with girls. After slimming down, I could talk to most any girl I wanted, but it never worked out for two reasons. I never met any who I liked, with the exception of one who things simply couldn't work out with (and I wasted a couple of years trying to make something work that couldn't). Other than that, blah, a guy and his buddies go to a bar, he meets a bunch of girls, and he realizes that each one is the quintessentially superficial American girl with those god-awful "90210"/"Legally Blonde" mannerisms and accent. So I kept focusing on my career, watching various friends hook up, move in together and get married, only to watch some of them later on break up.

It's true that you'll find true love when you're not looking. One day, there she was. It really pleased my mother and aunts, who always wanted me to marry a Filipina. She's kind, gentle and loving, besides intelligent and very practical about money, which is more than what Nuthead can claim about his wife. She does get a bit jealous, which isn't a problem, when other girls flirt with me. Like other people, I enjoy the feeling of being flirted with, but I can't have that now. Faithfulness is not just with the body, but the heart too. A faithful heart makes it easy to ignore smiles coupled with winks coupled with hairtosses, like one earlier today. So hey, if he wants to call me a "babe magnet," he said it, I didn't.

In any case, the guy is a jerk as always. He's a typical liberal -- when he can't refute, he resorts to insults. I could stoop to his level, but I won't. I'll simply remind him that my challenge above has no expiration date, and how about let's see him post a picture of his ugly mug and his wife? (Just give us fair warning, I don't want the horrid visages to burn out my LCD screen.) And I suppose I'll be just a touch insulting when I say I'm quite satisfied that, unlike him, I don't beat my wife or have to pay her for sex.

I always said I wanted civil discourse, but he began the flamefest by making personal attacks, and at that point, the gloves came off.

On a final note, not to make myself out to be a saint or anything, but many public schools in the Philippines are attended by children from invariably impoverished families. We're talking dirt poor. My family here has for years been helping our family over there, but I've taken it a step further with charity toward perfect strangers. I've become the benefactor of a certain elementary school, paying for children whose families can't afford to send them to school, buying supplies like , and introducing the principal to various U.S. charities that might be able to help. Now this liberal nitwit wants to insult an entire country of 80 million people -- let's see what he's doing to make their lives better.

Sunday, February 10, 2008

Joke of the day

Approaching the end of his presidency, George W. Bush works with the Democrat-controlled Congress to write a law giving a one-time $250,000 reparations payment to each black American descended from slaves. Democrats naturally support it wholeheartedly, and Bush convinces barely enough Republicans so it would pass: "Just trust me." But the GOP can't believe it when Bush proudly announces that he's invited Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton to the signing ceremony.

So there's the trio in the Oval Office, surrounded by White House aides and the press. Jesse's thinking how the money will come in handy for his child support payments, and Al's dreaming of a hamburger run. Bush signs the bill and then asks the two, "Do you happen to have your checkbooks with you today?" Jesse and Al look at Bush quizzically and simultaneously say, "What do you mean?"

Bush replies, "Well, I guess you missed the key amendment that Republicans put in. Reparations will be paid out after deducting the costs of welfare, housing projects and other federal social spending for black Americans, and after giving reparations to descendants of Union Army men who died in the Civil War. Rather than receive $250,000, the GAO calculates that each black American instead owes $39,165."

Jesse blurts out, "That's ridiculous! I was never on welfare. Why should I pay for something that never involved me?"

Al blows up, "Yeah, and why should money go to the descendants who were never hurt themselves?"

Tuesday, February 05, 2008

I'm the first to say that Medicare and other socialist (not to mention unconstitutional) programs should be abolished completely, but let's continue debunking a common lie since the start of Bush's administration. My blogfather Don Luskin has pointed out for a long time that, regardless of whether you think the programs are right or Constitutional, Bush has increased spending so much that it ought to make any liberal happy. I'm still trying to find his very detailed analysis that proves my point here, that Bush is hardly cutting funding from health care to childrens' programs -- his proposals are to cut only the increase in spending, so spending still increases.

MONDAY, Feb. 4 (HealthDay News) -- President Bush's new budget proposal would cut $196 billion over five years from both Medicare and Medicaid -- programs that provide health care to millions of poor and elderly, federal officials announced Monday.

The proposed cuts are part of a plan to stop Medicare from running out of money in little more than a decade, Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) Mike Leavitt told reporters during a press conference. He said the savings would help keep premiums affordable, maintain the Medicare/Medicaid system, and balance the current Medicare budget.

"The Medicare portion of the budget should be viewed as a stark warning," Leavitt said. "Medicare on its current course is 11 years from going broke. Americans have become numbed to entitlement warnings as a repeated cycle of alarms and inaction," he said.

But President Bush and Leavitt are sure to face a Congressional showdown over the budget proposals.

"This administration ought to know that five years' worth of Medicare and Medicaid cuts totaling $200 billion are dead on arrival with me and with most of the Congress," Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., and chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, told the Associated Press.

But if you want the truth, read further into the article:

Under the president's plan, the annual growth of Medicare spending would slow to 5 percent instead of the 7 percent currently projected. Similarly, spending growth would slow from 7.3 percent to 7 percent for Medicaid.

If a spendthrift family were going to spend 7% more, but instead spent only 5% more, is it accurate to say they "cut" their spending? Of course not. The fact is, spending will continue at a record pace. Even at 5%,

Well, why not accuse Bush of cutting the programs by 10%, or 20%, or 100%? Why don't Democrats just accuse Bush of cutting $1 trillion from the programs next year, because he wouldn't go along with a plan to increase taxes by $1 trillion? After all, the federal government could have increased spending the money as much as tax revenues and borrowing permit, by their warped logic.

Again, this is regardless of what you think about the programs. My initial point is that the MSM is so rabidly infected with Bush Derangement Syndrome that reducing a proposed 7% increase to 5% is a "cut" to them, and they've always seized on that as a lie. The very purpose is to rile up voters who live off taxes the rest of us pay, of course, and the sad thing is that it works. People believe the half-truths and outright lies that the news throws at them, like in this article. It's correct to point out the huge deficits under Bush, but it's completely dishonest to imply that things were great under Clinton:

Seven years ago, Bush took over a government predicted to generate $5.6 trillion in surpluses over 10 years.

Such predictions were overly optimistic, it turned out, being based on the unsustainable economic growth of the very late 1990s. Furthermore, let's say the $5.6 trillion in surpluses was realized somehow -- that wouldn't have been because of any spending cuts, but because Congress taxed us $5.6 trillion more than what they spent.

Now, if we want to talk about whether the programs should exist, the bottom line is that they're morally wrong. It's not morally wrong to help people, but it's morally wrong to steal from one unwilling group of people, no matter how benevolent the intentions may be. People like Paul Krugman would have you think that not funding these programs from the poor, because you're giving tax cuts to the rich, is "Dooh Nibor" economics, "Robin Hood" backwards, i.e. what they claim is theft from the poor to give to the rich. As Don Luskin explained, that couldn't be less true:

In other words, by cutting taxes that robbed high-income earners of their income -- and cutting government spending that transferred that stolen income to low-income earners -- we have a "transfer of income from the middle class to the very affluent"? If we simply reduce the rate at which we are stealing from the rich, are we therefore stealing from the poor? We can certainly have an argument about whether there ought to be redistributive taxes. But it's nothing but sophistry to suggest that a move toward less redistribution in the future constitutes robbery.

But this feeling of "entitlement" will persist so long as people think that majority voting somehow gives them a right to other people's property. I was thinking about this "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" quote the other day: "Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony."

Monday, February 04, 2008

The case against "Tax Hike Mike" Huckabee

Sunday, February 03, 2008

Jordin Sparks: the latest wannabe who just can't sing the Star Spangled Banner

Like so many, she couldn't seem to resist singing "glare," "wave," "free" and "brave" each have only one syllable. But for crying out loud, was it really necessary to turn "wave" into "wa-ay-ay-ay-ay-ave", or make the second syllable of "free" into a screech?

Update: with the game about to start, I forgot to add my main gripe, that she just couldn't get the timing right, besides singing at too slow a tempo. She seemed to lengthen certain beats for effect, which ruined the flow.

I didn't watch American Idol when she won, and I had never heard her sing before. I'm not impressed.

The latest battle between good and evil

Today, the warriors of New York (even if their home field is in New Jersey) shall wage battle against the devils of Massachusetts. "For by the law of God, no knight who is false can win in combat with one who is true." Should the Giants fail in their quest, we will know that God has indeed forsaken this land, and that evil is forever free to blanket our lives.

Most people will never fathom that this is just more legislative blackmail, this threat of "oversight" or "investigations." Shrillary can tout the mortgage interest rate freeze as "voluntary" until the final days when she and the devil are cast into the lake of fire, but it was no more voluntary than giving your wallet to a mugger so he won't shoot you. Now Kerry's doing this to the NFL: do things my way, or Congress will step in and legislate you to death.

It's not special interests. It's called private property and the rights thereof. Somebody owns the team. Somebody owns the network. If they can't get to an agreement about broadcasting, well, that's just too frickin' bad for the viewers. No one has a right, in the literal sense, to watch the game. The only "right" to watch the game is purely contractual, and it does not exist in this situation. If it's publicly broadcast, no one has a contractual right to watch it. Even if it were being broadcast on cable, viewers still would have no contractual right, unless it were specified in a contract. PPV, for example, is a contract that for a certain sum of money, you gain the contractual right to watch an event. The same contract also normally says that if you can't watch it, your only recourse is a refund (which is fair, otherwise sports "fans" would sue for millions of dollars if something got screwed up).

But like other socialists, Kerry doesn't believe that people truly own their property. Today we're legislated and regulated to where we effectively own our property only at the whim of others.

For the very reason that Kerry is their fan, just like my dad always rooted against the Redskins because our family always hated their city, I pray the Patriots get their asses kicked.

Saturday, February 02, 2008

Bush Derangement Syndrome close to home

Several members of my own family actually buy into the rubbish that our economy is suffering "because Bush is sending billions of dollars to Iraq."

There's simply no arguing with people who have lost all sense of reality. Not that I'm defending the waste and mismanagement of the Iraq War (whose intent and good results I still defend). Indeed, from the past echoes a voice:

We are told that the money is an advance and that, a few centuries from now, we shall recover it a hundredfold. But who says so? The very Quartermaster General's Department that swindles us out of our money. Listen here, gentlemen, when it comes to cash, there is but one useful piece of advice: let each man watch his purse... and those to whom he entrusts the purse-strings.

And it is true, the promise of Iraq repaying the U.S. with oil has hardly materialized. But Americans, unlike the French with Algeria, are hardly paying "From one third to two fifths of [our] four direct taxes" to finance Iraq.

Americans have far more to worry about with the welfare state at home, but they're too blind to see. And it really looks like they'll be stupid enough to elect Hillary or Obama, which will be saving us from Beelzebub so we can be damned with Mephistopheles.

"You are not to inquire how your trade may be increased, nor how you are to become a great and powerful people, but how your liberties can be secured; for liberty ought to be the direct end of your government."
- Patrick Henry, 1788